Is "Devil Worship" another Abrahamic faith?

[Villager]

Okay, that's fine. If you want to say that Satan is not the antithesis of Good per standard Christian theology and instead say that he's merely a belly-ache, that's your business.

It's Jews' business, too? Well, well.

 

[blackout]

Well, since ha-Satan is usually translated as 'the adversary' and it says God creates 'adversity', that can be interpreted as God creates that which gives the adversary his adversarial nature. And since in Christian theology, the adversary is The Adversary, that means God creates Adversity.

You're welcome.

Great.

 

[blackout]

I wonder if Job felt that he faced much adversity?

 

[Levite]

"I form light, I create darkness; I make well-being, I create adversity." Is 45:7

That is not an accurate translation.

The Hebrew reads: Yotzer or u'voreh choshech, oseh shalom u'voreh et ha-ra, ani YHVH oseh et kol eileh. The literal translation of this is: "Bringer-forth of light and creator of darkness, maker of peace and creator of evil: I YHVH make all these." A standard idiomatic translation would be: "I bring forth light and create darkness, make peace and create evil: I YHVH do all these things."

While it might be possible to make an argument that the word ra ("evil") is not meant to be taken quite so literally there, it would be hard to make an argument that the meaning could be "adversity," which is very different, and there are extant words in Biblical Hebrew which have that meaning. So to use it as a translation in that verse seems more like bowdlerization than rendering.

 

[Snidely Whiplash]

Neither was protestantism.

Abraham's faith was contemporary Protestantism.

 

[Draka]

I tell ya, this is starting to remind me of a Lewis Black skit:

[youtube]LGrlWOhtj3g[/youtube]

Leave the OT translations to the Jews

Granted, most of the skit is about evolution, but the parts about the OT being the Jews' book is right on for this It's hilarious, but he does get crude, so if you you get offended easily don't bother watching.

 

[Villager]

it would be hard to make an argument that the meaning could be "adversity,"

Adversity, trouble.

'In his pride the wicked does not seek him; in all his thoughts there is no room for God. His ways are always prosperous; he is haughty and your laws are far from him; he sneers at all his enemies. He says to himself, "Nothing will shake me; I'll always be happy and never have trouble." Ps 10:4-6 NIV

'Trouble' doesn't seem too far-fetched a meaning there.

'"Come now, let's kill him and throw him into one of these cisterns and say that a ferocious animal devoured him."' Ge 37:20 NIV

One might say that an animal is evil, but it might be hard to make an argument that it actually is morally evil.

'In process of time, at the end of two years, his bowels fell out by reason of his sickness, and he died of sore diseases.' 2Chr 21:19 JPS

 

[Snidely Whiplash]

Adversity, trouble.

'In his pride the wicked does not seek him; in all his thoughts there is no room for God. His ways are always prosperous; he is haughty and your laws are far from him; he sneers at all his enemies. He says to himself, "Nothing will shake me; I'll always be happy and never have trouble." Ps 10:4-6 NIV

'Trouble' doesn't seem too far-fetched a meaning there.

'"Come now, let's kill him and throw him into one of these cisterns and say that a ferocious animal devoured him."' Ge 37:20 NIV

One might say that an animal is evil, but it might be hard to make an argument that it actually is morally evil.

'In process of time, at the end of two years, his bowels fell out by reason of his sickness, and he died of sore diseases.' 2Chr 21:19 JPS

Or, put in the "decentese" spoken by respectable people, he excreted himself to death!

 

[Levite]

Adversity, trouble.

'In his pride the wicked does not seek him; in all his thoughts there is no room for God. His ways are always prosperous; he is haughty and your laws are far from him; he sneers at all his enemies. He says to himself, "Nothing will shake me; I'll always be happy and never have trouble." Ps 10:4-6 NIV

'Trouble' doesn't seem too far-fetched a meaning there.

'"Come now, let's kill him and throw him into one of these cisterns and say that a ferocious animal devoured him."' Ge 37:20 NIV

One might say that an animal is evil, but it might be hard to make an argument that it actually is morally evil.

'In process of time, at the end of two years, his bowels fell out by reason of his sickness, and he died of sore diseases.' 2Chr 21:19 JPS

Context counts for a lot in translation. Isaiah 45:7 discusses God philosophically as ultimate source of all things, and frames it in terms of dyadic absolutes. Granted, shalom and ra make an unusual pairing, but one might extend the meaning perhaps to indicate "order" and "chaos" rather than "good and evil," if one postulates that shalom here ought properly to be read as shalem "wholeness," which was an occasional euphemism for order in society. But a meaning of "adversity" is something different: it will not pair, in terms of either Hebrew literary structure, or in terms of Biblical theology, with either "peace" or "order." It is simply not a good rendering of ra here.

In other contexts, it may be clear that ra is being used not in a philosophical sense but in an idiomatic sense, as in the quotes from Chronicles and Genesis. But those contexts are not the same as the one in Isaiah, or in many other places where ra has either more literal or more technical meanings, and is not being used idiomatically.

 

[Villager]

Context counts for a lot in translation. Isaiah 45:7 discusses God philosophically as ultimate source of all things, and frames it in terms of dyadic absolutes. Granted, shalom and ra make an unusual pairing

That's the whole point here. What we have here is the common biblical double antithesis, in this case going from the figurative, the general, to the more particular. There is no tsedaqah, no righteousness, to contrast with evil in either part. In light there is knowledge and instruction, rather than goodness; in darkness there is confusion and ignorance, misery and destruction, rather than sin. There is contentment, welfare, well-being, here in shalom- a consequence of righteousness, perhaps, but not righteousness itself. So 'evil' is not in antithesis, and would be an improper rendition.

The uses in the quotes from Chronicles and Genesis conclusively illustrate that ra was not used to mean 'evil' exclusively, in any case. Death from wild beasts is no less philosophical or idiomatic than death from adversity or disaster. Indeed, it is just one avenue of disaster, which comes upon the righteous and the unrighteous, like the weather.

but one might extend the meaning perhaps to indicate "order" and "chaos" rather than "good and evil,"

Indeed, one might do just that. Order is a prerequisite for prosperity, and is all but a synonym for peace, both of which are meanings of shalom. Now absence of peace is war, is disorder, is chaos, as you put it; it is even disaster, as some translators render it. The word 'adversity' is milder, is no overstatement, yet covers all of these, and is usefully unspecific. It makes a perfect contrast in antithesis with any acceptable rendition of shalom. Perhaps here the perfect rendition in English:

"I form light, I create darkness; I make well-being, I create adversity." Is 45:7

One might quibble about the verb selection, but the nouns there cannot be bettered.

 

[free spirit]

There are people who actually worship the Abrahamic biblical entity known as "Satan" or "The Devil". Now, would not those people fall under the heading of Abrahamic and their faith/religion also be considered an Abrahamic religion just like Christianity and Islam and Judaism?

Mind you, I'm not talking about what is known today as Neo-Satanism or the like. I'm talking strictly about actual worship and following of the theistic entity "Satan" or "The Devil".

I've seen people try to say that worshiping Satan is Paganism, but Paganism includes religions and pantheons not of the Abrahamic pantheon. Since Satan belong to the Abrahamic pantheon and mythology...then shouldn't worship of said entity be claimed as Abrahamic, and NOT Pagan?

All I know is that Abraham is the father of faith: faith in a good and loving God. But some have faith in capricious Gods, or no Gods at all. Faith is to use other words trust, or believe in something good. It is a contradiction in terms to put your trust or faith, or believe, in something evil, unless you are engaged in a war. Some people are strange and confused, they have no wisdom or order in their life: they are most to be pitied.

 

[Draka]

All I know is that Abraham is the father of faith: faith in a good and loving God. But some have faith in capricious Gods, or no Gods at all. Faith is to use other words trust, or believe in something good. It is a contradiction in terms to put your trust or faith, or believe, in something evil, unless you are engaged in a war. Some people are strange and confused, they have no wisdom or order in their life: they are most to be pitied.

Nice thread necro.

So, in your opinion, those who worship a malevolent being do not have actual faith? There are many whom believe that the Abrahamic god itself is a malevolent and cruel being. Luciferians see the entity known as "God" as being the one that is "evil" and see Lucifer as the "Light Bringer". The one whom bestows knowledge. When one views the Abrahamic god as being the one on the cruel and evil side, it makes sense that there are ones that view his opposition as the "good side".

All that said, it appears you still didn't address my actual point that theistic Satanism or "Devil worship" still falls under the Abrahamic umbrella. It certainly is not Pagan as Pagans are those who don't hold to the Abrahamic pantheon or mythology. Those that believe in "Satan"/"the devil"/"Lucifer", in fact, do. Therefore, those followings, those religions, are Abrahamic religions/faiths.